4.0 Review

Probiotics: A gut response to the COVID-19 pandemic but what does the evidence show?

Journal

CLINICAL NUTRITION ESPEN
Volume 51, Issue -, Pages 17-27

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2022.08.023

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Gut microbiome; Lung microbiome; Probiotics; Respiratory tract infections; Supplements

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This review article discusses the role of gut and lung microbiomes in COVID-19 and potential mechanisms of action of probiotics. Although there is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of probiotics for COVID-19, the role of microbiomes in the pathogenesis and treatment of COVID-19 cannot be ignored.
Since the global outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), research has focused on understanding the etiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Identifying and developing prophylactic and therapeutics strategies to manage the pandemic is still of critical importance. Among potential targets, the role of the gut and lung microbiomes in COVID-19 has been questioned. Consequently, probiotics were touted as potential prophylactics and therapeutics for COVID-19. In this review we highlight the role of the gut and lung microbiome in COVID-19 and potential mechanisms of action of probiotics. We also discuss the progress of ongoing clinical trials for COVID-19 that aim to modulate the microbiome using probiotics in an effort to develop prophylactic and therapeutic strategies. To date, despite the large interest in this area of research, there is promising but limited evidence to suggest that probiotics are an effective prophylactic or treatment strategy for COVID-19. However, the role of the microbiome in pathogenesis and as a potential target for therapeutics of COVID-19 cannot be discounted. (c) 2022 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available